UKBouldering.com

Nikon DSLR (Read 75761 times)

dave

  • Guest
#250 Re: Nikon DSLR
August 23, 2010, 05:39:10 pm
Just realised that a 12mp m4/3 sensor is asking for greater resolution than a 24mp FX, by a factor of about root 2 (linear res), so bearing in mind i tested both on the gf1 it might be unfair on the nikon since there isn't a nikon body that requires this level of resolution. But as it happens, pretending the gf1 is only 6mp (i.e. the downsampling my test files) doesn't mask the differences enough anyway.

dave

  • Guest
#251 Re: Nikon DSLR
August 23, 2010, 05:40:59 pm
p.s. Handling is ok so far.

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11052
  • Karma: +625/-20
#252 Re: Nikon DSLR
August 23, 2010, 05:55:23 pm
Right, that makes more sense. A test vs a D3 would be fairer, but its hardly surprising if the Nikon is inferior - its covering an area 3.5X the size for less than a third of the cost after all.

dave

  • Guest
#253 Re: Nikon DSLR
August 23, 2010, 06:27:10 pm
A test vs a D3 would be fairer

Done - I'll get cofe to lend me one of his.

stevej

Offline
  • **
  • menacing presence
  • Posts: 171
  • Karma: +10/-0
#254 Re: Nikon DSLR
September 10, 2010, 12:34:20 am
Had this pointed out to me: New (not refurbished etc.) D60 + 18-55 kit lens* for 270+4pp at the argos ebay outlet store w/ 12 month warrenty. Don't know a thing about photography but that looks a decent price for a entry-level body (google tells me that among other things, "it's designed for normal hands" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean). They've got 240 of them left but the number is steadily going down...

*for what it's worth, I'm informed it says it's a 18-55 AF-S DX but someone who has already bought one was sent the 18-55 VR lens instead

Paul B

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 9035
  • Karma: +237/-4
#255 Re: Nikon DSLR
September 10, 2010, 12:46:58 am
Had this pointed out to me: New (not refurbished etc.) D60 + 18-55 kit lens* for 270+4pp at the argos ebay outlet store w/ 12 month warrenty. Don't know a thing about photography but that looks a decent price for a entry-level body (google tells me that among other things, "it's designed for normal hands" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean). They've got 240 of them left but the number is steadily going down...

*for what it's worth, I'm informed it says it's a 18-55 AF-S DX but someone who has already bought one was sent the 18-55 VR lens instead

Read here for details of the changes:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-55_3p5-5p6_vr_n15/
Sounds like the VR had a good reputation.

I can't really comment on Nikons as I don't own one but it may be worth fondling both that and a Canon and see where that leaves you. Value wise, you can get the D3000 (Nikons current entry level for a very similar price with the VR). Again I can't comment what tech is inside that.

The hands thing; I've read somewhere that Canon is designed for smaller hands from the East. This could be nonesense like many of the things I read.

205Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1116
  • Karma: +125/-0
#256 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 07:21:31 pm
Resurrecting an old topic:

I'm thinking about upgrading my SLR, currently got a D60 with the 18-55mm kit lens. Although I've not got any other lenses I'm planning to stick to Nikon unless someone can give me a very good reason not to (Cofe / Paul B??).

It's mainly going to get used for bouldering pics but I'm also after video mode for when I wind up at the crag by myself.

Looking at the current Nikon line up apart from the video function the D5100 doesn't seem like a big step up from what I've currently got as it lacks an auto focus motor in the body and no wireless flash control.

The D90 is still listed in the current line up on the Nikon website but it looks to have been superseded to all intents and purposes by the D7000.

I can find the D90 body for sale at 519, whereas the cheapest I can find the D7000 is 877. Even the D300s is only 890.

Is it going to be worth spending the extra ~350 on the D7000 / 300s or am I better buying a D90 and putting the difference towards a lens?

Any knowledge much appreciated.

Jim

Offline
  • *****
  • Trusted Users
  • forum hero
  • Mostly Injured
  • Posts: 8645
  • Karma: +234/-18
  • Pregnant Horse
    • Bouldering POI's for tomtom
#257 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 08:36:37 pm
To me it seems like a very big step up considering you've only been using a kit lens.
I think all the new nikons don't have auto-focus motors in the body anymore as all the new lens do (AF-S)?
I've got a D3100 and it a good size, a lot smaller and lighter than the D90 etc.. and with the 35mm DX lens on it pretty portable.
I would certainly leave room in the budget for a good lens or 2

I take it you know about this web site:
http://camerapricebuster.com/cat_Nikon_Digital_SLRs.html
« Last Edit: May 07, 2012, 08:42:45 pm by Jim »

Paul B

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 9035
  • Karma: +237/-4
#258 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 08:44:05 pm
I'd ask yourself if you NEED the mirror?

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11052
  • Karma: +625/-20
#259 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 08:49:16 pm
Short answer is I would look for a second-hand D7000. There are definitely no good reasons to switch to Canon currently - video has a better rep on some of the more expensive bodies but I think Nikon's wireless flash control is a bigger reason to stay. Second option would be a second-hand D90, which would be a lot cheaper if you want to get some glass too. No point buying new cameras or lenses as a rule.

Review with D90 comparisons: http://bythom.com/nikond7000review.htm
« Last Edit: May 07, 2012, 08:55:15 pm by Johnny Brown »

Paul B

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 9035
  • Karma: +237/-4
#260 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 09:17:11 pm
Short answer is I would look for a second-hand D7000. There are definitely no good reasons to switch to Canon currently - video has a better rep on some of the more expensive bodies almost all of the bodies, even ones which canon didn't actually fit with a video mode (without touching Qscale) but I think Nikon's wireless flash control is a bigger reason to stay Canon's wireless flash system is utter shit unless you have the $$$ for the new radio system.

I still think that for tripod use, something with a long record function like an NEX would be better than a mirror flapping around (not a problem on the D7000).

205Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1116
  • Karma: +125/-0
#261 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 09:17:46 pm
Yeah I'd seen that site already thanks Jim, that's where I got my prices from.

If I wasn't after video capability I probably wouldn't be upgrading. I did contemplate a second hand HV20 or similar for video but I'd rather have one camera that does both rather than lug around a camera and video recorder.

Cheers for that link JB. Any suggestions on where I should be looking for second hand kit - Ffordes / ebay??

cofe

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5771
  • Karma: +184/-5
#262 Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 10:07:22 pm
What's your budget Chris?

tomtom

Online
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 20464
  • Karma: +637/-11
#263 Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 10:17:16 pm
Main advantages of 5100 over 3100 are mainly faster fps, and the flippy screen. Flippy screen is surpisingly handy for video and for taking shots low down and over the head (I have a d5000 and use its flippyoutedness much more than I thought..).. Mind you, 3100 body is quite a bit cheaper than 5100...

Not sure if 5100 has more control over the vid.. One of the probs I've had with Nikon video on 3100 and 5000 is its hard/a little hidden to change exposure settings etc... Might be worth checking out..

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11052
  • Karma: +625/-20
#264 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 07, 2012, 10:40:21 pm
I usually use ebay to get an idea of prices, then buy from dealer who offer a bit of service.

205Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1116
  • Karma: +125/-0
#265 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 06:11:03 am
What's your budget Chris?

Hoping to get a body & lens for under a grand.

cofe

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5771
  • Karma: +184/-5
#266 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 10:24:04 am
I think if you've only got that body and one lens, then you're not committed to any one system, as you'll just bin the lot off when you get a new camera. I think you can get a lot of camera and lens for a grand. I'm no Canon evangelist but it's worth looking at what you could get other than Nikon, and I wouldn't consider a camera's ability to remotely trigger a flashgun a priority at all, esp when you can pick up decent triggers for next to nothing (this is a tangent).

You could probably pick up a secondhand 550D, 15-85 IS lens, and 50mm 1.4 lens for a grand. That would give you hi-res pics with good ISO control, 1080p video, a good zoom range in a well regarded image stabilised lens, and an additional super sharp fast lens.

Paul's point about the mirror and NEX cameras is worth considering too. Do you need an SLR? Will photos be a priority over video, or are they equally weighted? What about Sony NEX cameras, Panasonic GX1, or some others that I don't know much about?

Problem is, there's too much choice...

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11052
  • Karma: +625/-20
#267 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 10:49:50 am
Nikon lens equivalents would be 16-85 (I do 80% with this lens now) and 50/ 1.8 or 1.4, similar price if not cheaper to Canon as they've been around longer.

I'm no expert on the low end bodies but the general rule seems to be Nikon's handle better and have superior sensors and AF, whilst Canon have implemented video better. Newer generations tend to leapfrog the old though, so for the same price its a choice between a more pro-spec body with an older sensor, or a flimsier body with no extras but a newer sensor. Switching systems is no big deal but you will have a headstart on the handling if you stick. Most climbing photographers shoot Nikon, except for Simmonite and Pickford.

I imagine Nikon's wireless flash is something you don't miss if you've never had. Its brilliant, and it just works, which is a big contrast to the 3rd party triggers I've used.

There is a lot of choice, but you can't beat an SLR for learning about photography, not much beats a proper TTL viewfinder, and the access to a big system.

cofe

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5771
  • Karma: +184/-5
#268 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 11:07:15 am
I don't think there's that much in any of the cameras out in the last few years. They are all - bottom line - not shit. You could get a new 60D with 17-85 plus a 50mm 1.8 for a shade over a grand. That's some Canon options anyway.

JB's last point about viewfinder is a good one. Not having a viewfinder on a camera does my nut. I guess a downside of the Nex and micro 4/3 cameras, though you can buy electronic ones.

dave

  • Guest
#269 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 12:01:22 pm
I've used systems both with and without built-in wireless flash control, and I am pretty sure that having it is a massive bonus. You can forgive the tiny m4/3ds not having it as you're likely to not be carrying a flash anyway, but on an SLR its worth going with nikon for. So much easier,faster and less faff than triggers.

Having said all that, these days off camera flash is hardly novel any more, and in some cases is grossly overused, so maybe not having it as an easy option is a good thing.

For shallow DOF stuff/long lens a viewfinder is great, for wide to normal/landscape use I prefer a screen. It abstracts things a bit.

205Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1116
  • Karma: +125/-0
#270 Re: Nikon DSLR
May 08, 2012, 04:58:43 pm
Cheers all, some good food for thought there.

ali k

Offline
  • ****
  • junky
  • Posts: 772
  • Karma: +34/-1
#271 Re: Nikon DSLR
April 25, 2013, 01:47:25 pm
Resurrecting this thread again.

After several days trawling through reviews and specs I'm currently looking at some of the Nikon line-up (in particular the D7000 and D300s).

Anyone with either of these cameras care to share an opinion one way or the other - particularly between the D7000 and D300s practical pros and cons. The D7000 is surprisingly cheap (640 body only new) considering it supposedly gives the D300s a run for its money. Is it worth the extra ~250 for the 300s do you think? Or would a 2nd hand 300s be a better investment?

Also, given that I'm not in a rush to buy is the 300s likely to drop in price in the next few months with any new releases in the pipeline?

slackline

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 19132
  • Karma: +633/-26
    • Sheffield Boulder
#272 Re: Nikon DSLR
April 25, 2013, 01:57:39 pm

ali k

Offline
  • ****
  • junky
  • Posts: 772
  • Karma: +34/-1
#273 Re: Nikon DSLR
April 25, 2013, 02:45:55 pm
Yeh I've been keeping my eye on Harrisons - saw that one. Unfortunately I won't be actually buying till June so putting the time in with research until then.

Just can't work out the practical differences between that and the 7000.

everythingConnected

Offline
  • *
  • newbie
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: +0/-0
#274 Re: Nikon DSLR
November 13, 2015, 02:28:45 pm
Always good to resurrect a thread, again...

Some very good cameras now available pretty cheap second hand eg. running from a D90 at around 200 sheets, through D3300, D5300 to D7000 and D7100 at approx 400 scones.

Theres a few examples of some quality kit. Anyone got any suggestions as to what buys the most bang for its buck in that sort of range at the moment? My D80 (bought second hand years ago) is now looking pretty lacking, and I have been very happy with it. I think an upgrade could be very impressive.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2022, SimplePortal